posted at 9:51 am on June 30, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

Two of the most contentious cases on the Supreme Court’s 2013-14 docket finally get resolved today, after which the justices will take a powder from Washington for three months. Both of them would be tasty enough to command attention all day on their own, and today’s end-of-session dissemination will probably drive commentary for the rest of the week. The announcements start at 10 am ET, so we will follow along with updates to this post with the results, with the potential for deeper analysis later.

By now, everyone’s familiar with Hobby Lobby/Conestoga, and perhaps with Harris v Quinn. Hobby Lobby/Conestoga is the first Supreme Court test for the HHS mandate, which we have covered extensively, but it won’t be the last. This case involves the question of whether the freedom of religious expression for owners of for-profit businesses trump the state interest in providing expanded access to birth control. The latter, Harris, poses the question of whether the state can designate aid recipients as state workers for the purpose of forcibly unionizing them. Both cases have a wide range of outcomes, including the Supreme Court doing nothing much at all. (Gabriel Malor’s primer on the final cases at SCOTUS is particularly helpful.)

Jazz offered his take on the potential outcomes yesterday, and I’ll speculate on Hobby Lobby/Conestoga, at least. The court ruled unanimously last Thursday in McCullen that Massachusetts overreached on state intervention on free speech without considering less intrusive means for satisfying a legitimate state interest, which in that case was public safety. The state interest in expanding contraception access is even less compelling than public safety was in McCullen, and the intrusion far more offensive to First Amendment rights. I’d expect a 6-3 or 7-2 ruling on that basis to strike down the HHS contraception mandate, which would avoid at least in part a decision on the legitimacy of religious expression for business owners. But then again, I am an eternal optimist.

On Harris, I have no prediction to make. I’d like to see the court stop the forced unionization of home health workers (and day care providers) whose only basis for the claim of being a state worker is receiving benefits through safety-net programs, but I’m not completely certain that this court is the one that will make that kind of stand. We’ll see soon enough.

Update: Justice Sam Alito wrote both opinions, which spells bad news for the White House. First up was Harris, decided 5-4 against the unions. Home care workers cannot be forced into unions. However, at first blush it doesn’t appear that the decision struck down Abood, so it’s still a limited ruling.

#BREAKING: On 5-4 vote, Supreme Court stops short of overturning key 1977 precedent that allows public unions to collect fees

That puts a stake through the heart of the HHS contraception mandate when applied to not-for-profit organizations, especially those with religious affiliations. Even on a narrow ownership basis, this ruling all but kills the HHS mandate for anything except for-profit corporations with broad public ownership.

As Hugh Hewitt says, it’s a big victory:

Some friends in MSM and opponents on left will attempt to minimize @HobbyLobbyCase, but it is a huge win for religious liberty and RFRA

The majority opinion, by holding that the nonprofit accommodation is a less restrictive means for accommodating closely held for-profit business suggests (at least to me) that the non-profits who object to that process (because they don’t want to have to certify that they object to providing contraceptive coverage) are in trouble. Seems unlikely the Court would say that this is a less restrictive means in this case, only to later hold that it is unconstitutional. But that’s a very quick reaction.

As compared to the HHS mandate, the accommodation qualifies as a less restrictive means under RFRA whether or not the accommodation itself would survive a RFRA challenge. If the Court rules against the HHS mandate on the ground that the accommodation is a less restrictive means, there would be no reason for it to express any view on whether the accommodation itself satisfies RFRA. Among other things, that question hasn’t been briefed at all in this case, and it is the subject of pending litigation brought by religious nonprofits. …

In sum (and contrary to what Linda Greenhouse, near the end of her latest onlinecolumn, seems to suppose), a resolution of the Hobby Lobby case on this minimalist ground would not mean that Hobby Lobby and other for-profit challengers would have to accept the accommodation. Nor would such a resolution eliminate the prospect that the Court would have to address, a year or so down the road, the separate arguments that the accommodation does not further any compelling interest and that it is not the least restrictive means of advancing any such interest.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

If Texas does declare it’s independence, how will they handle there borders with the United States.

Will those who live in the United States be able to enter the Republic of Texas without a passport? Who will be allowed citizenship? Can one just declare RoT citizenship? Would one have to be a property owner or just have an address?

davidk on June 30, 2014 at 1:39 PM

The borders would be handled like our current northern border with Canada. All of your questions are addressed on the web site that I linked to under the FAQ.

We’ll never get a chance to test that theory, sound though I believe it is, as long as we continue to celebrate exercises of government power. Such as Supreme Court rulings.

I see no reason not to celebrate. It is a push back. It offers hope that we can fix this through the system rather than having to take more extreme steps. Personally I just view this as a pause on our down ware slide nothing more. I pray that I’m wrong.

I didn’t expect it to be so grim in here. You won! Is nothing good enough for you people?

Or maybe, just maybe, you’re disconcerted about the reaction in the public. This isn’t really being celebrated…anyway. Maybe people are starting to put two and two together re your intense concern about the implementation of Sharia Law, and American religious leaders desire to make Christianity a condition of employment. Admit it, you know you want it. And you’re closer to it. So celebrate. You won.

thank you. I went to the main page. I need to dig around some. Again, Thank you.

davidk on June 30, 2014 at 1:56 PM

Thanks for going there, David. You will see that this is not a ‘fly by night’, knee jerk group of malcontents; rather it is a serious group of patriotic, free thinking, independent minded, traditional Americans who are tired of the liberal progressive agenda that has claimed our nation.

Our goal is NOT a violent separation. We desire a peaceful, organized separation between the two countries, with a strong alliance being forged between the two of us.

I didn’t expect it to be so grim in here. You won! Is nothing good enough for you people?

Or maybe, just maybe, you’re disconcerted about the reaction in the public. This isn’t really being celebrated…anyway. Maybe people are starting to put two and two together re your intense concern about the implementation of Sharia Law, and American religious leaders desire to make Christianity a condition of employment. Admit it, you know you want it. And you’re closer to it. So celebrate. You won.

I didn’t expect it to be so grim in here. You won! Is nothing good enough for you people?

Or maybe, just maybe, you’re disconcerted about the reaction in the public. This isn’t really being celebrated…anyway. Maybe people are starting to put two and two together re your intense concern about the implementation of Sharia Law, and American religious leaders desire to make Christianity a condition of employment. Admit it, you know you want it. And you’re closer to it. So celebrate. You won.

I see that the projection is strong with you as well….which makes this apply equally to you…

Only true fascists believe that all others act with the same fascist tendencies, values, and diktat. You think those closely held corporationsconservatives would embrace fascism because you embrace fascism.

Look on the bright side, Citizen, your boy Dog Eater is already talking about conducting a flank attack, and if there’s one thing lefties have carried-over from the Dubya era it’s a love of preznidential overrides.

No. My point is that people must be able to defend against those that wish to take there rights from them. If a people wish to separate from another people they must have that. Again Bundy the government came they met armed people. Where shots fired?

Or maybe, just maybe, you’re disconcerted about the reaction in the public. This isn’t really being celebrated…
libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 1:59 PM

It’s a foreign concept, I know. But principled positions rarely have the appeal to popularity. And they never use that as its reasoning. So I can see your difficulty in understanding. Why here, look at this:

Maybe people are starting to put two and two together re your intense concern about the implementation of Sharia Law, and American religious leaders desire to make Christianity a condition of employment. Admit it, you know you want it.
libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 1:59 PM

I used to think that the internet would always be a net plus in the aggregate to informed debate because it is such a giant repository of knowledge. But in the end, Pope was right:

A little Learning is a dang’rous Thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian Spring:
There shallow Draughts intoxicate the Brain,
And drinking largely sobers us again.

Idiots read headlines and hashtags and think themselves informed, which only fuels their righteous indignation. Of course, they’re completely unaware of the actual facts of this case. But their circle of epistemic closure and solipsistic revelry on Twitter feeds their ego to the point that they consider themselves experts.

I didn’t expect it to be so grim in here. You won! Is nothing good enough for you people?

Or maybe, just maybe, you’re disconcerted about the reaction in the public. This isn’t really being celebrated…anyway. Maybe people are starting to put two and two together re your intense concern about the implementation of Sharia Law, and American religious leaders desire to make Christianity a condition of employment. Admit it, you know you want it. And you’re closer to it. So celebrate. You won.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 1:59 PM

You’re on to us libfree. I don’t know how we kept it secret so long.

Brendan Eich being fired for not being Christian was our biggest step this year.

You are just hell bent on inducing someone to incite sedition or other violent threats against the government.

To be clear: No one is advocating any such thing. For myself, I advocate a PEACEFUL, organized separation of my State of Texas from the United States. It is quite clear that the values, traditions, aspirations, goals, morals, philosophies and cultural differences are no longer in sync between the two entities.

Like a marriage where one party violates the sanctimony of and the trust of the other, a divorce is necessary, if not desired. The United States has violated the covenant between itself and the State of Texas, and we want a divorce.

Maybe people are starting to put two and two together re your intense concern about the implementation of Sharia Law, and American religious leaders desire to make Christianity a condition of employment. Admit it, you know you want it.
libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 1:59 PM

HL offers 16 of 20 BC options as part of its health insurance = “you must be this Christian” sign outside the door for possible applicants.

It looks like you’re all for discrimination on the basis of race, sexual preference, political beliefs, age, and religious beliefs by private employers. Is that correct?
jim56 on June 30, 2014 at 12:49 PM

Whoa, how did you ever guess that so quickly??? You must be a super duper genius like totally OMG!!!1!11!1!!!!

Like a marriage where one party violates the sanctimony of and the trust of the other, a divorce is necessary, if not desired. The United States has violated the covenant between itself and the State of Texas, and we want a divorce.

It’s really that simple. And it does not require violence.

bimmcorp on June 30, 2014 at 2:22 PM

This much effort spent on get out the vote efforts would be more helpful.

This much effort spent on get out the vote efforts would be more helpful.

faraway on June 30, 2014 at 2:30 PM

To vote for whom, Sparky? Another beltway Republican? No thanks. We have folks here in Texas like Ted Cruz, Rick Perry & Greg Abbott who have our interests at heart.

As I have repeatedly said on this site, I am done with the republican Sham-Wow salesmen. Finished. No more. Y’all can get out the vote all you wish, pal..I prefer to get out of y’all’s country. Why is that so difficult for you to comprehend?

But the court is not a co-equal branch. Its powers are very firmly and specifically delineated. The problem with trusting the court to make the right decision is that it can just as easily make the wrong one, and it would be a huge mistake to assume that the court (again worth noting, a part of the government we don’t normally trust with power otherwise) would do better with more power than it has done with less.

gryphon202 on June 30, 2014 at 12:22 PM

It most certainly is a co-equal branch, which is why I asked you to go read Marbury v Madison. In that decision, the Marshall Court asserted the right of the Judicial Branch to review legislation and Executive Branch decisions.

There are indeed three co-equal branches of government. Of those three, only one has actively and destructively sought to encroach on the powers of its equals, and that is the Executive Branch. The last five years have shown how much damage can be done when one of the putatively co-equal branches believes that it can do whatever the hell it wants and get away with it.

As I mentioned in my original comment, the 2016 election is critically important. Republicans are likely to hold the House come January 2017. The Senate is a coin-flip. Ergo, the right or center-right must gain control of the White House, or we are at least a generation away from righting wrongs that might not ever be righted.

Don’t sit out 2016 because the eventual GOP candidate ain’t conservative enough. To do so is to endorse decades of ISIS-like overrun.

“The president will address the Republican leadership’s unwillingness to bring immigration reform up for an up-or-down vote and the president will announce a new effort to fix as much of our broken immigration system as he can through executive action,” the official said in a statement.

So instead of fighting for votes, you sit behind your keyboard dreaming about delusional things that don’t have a snowballs chance in hell of happening?

Dreaming isn’t fighting.

faraway on June 30, 2014 at 2:45 PM

I live in Texas, son. My politics are conservative. “Red”, for you. In Texas we have 2 conservative Senators, a conservative Governor and conservative representation in Congress and at the State level. I do not need to fight for any votes. We already have all we need right here. And that’s my point.

You fools on the coasts are the ones who need to hustle up the votes or man up and do something similar to what we in Texas are doing.

You call the Texas Nationalist Movement ‘delusional’, and I would be willing to bet you did not have the intellectual honesty, curiosity or flat out courtesy to even bother to check out the web site that I posted. Did you?

I will ask you politely to again, do some research prior to mocking, belittling or otherwise condemning that which you have no knowledge of. But if you cannot manage that, then I would encourage you to simply go shimmy up a cactus. Your choice.

Thanks for the link. It was interesting. So, do I understand correctly, you are trying to get Texans to vote on whether or not they want independence? What kind of support do you think independence has in Texas right now? Do you have recent polling data?

I didn’t expect it to be so grim in here. You won! Is nothing good enough for you people?

Or maybe, just maybe, you’re disconcerted about the reaction in the public. This isn’t really being celebrated…anyway. Maybe people are starting to put two and two together re your intense concern about the implementation of Sharia Law, and American religious leaders desire to make Christianity a condition of employment. Admit it, you know you want it. And you’re closer to it. So celebrate. You won.

No. My point is that people must be able to defend against those that wish to take there rights from them. If a people wish to separate from another people they must have that. Again Bundy the government came they met armed people. Where shots fired?

wifarmboy on June 30, 2014 at 2:07 PM

The National Divorce (as I think it should be called) between the Red States that choose to separate and DC) will only be as violent as the Regime wants to make it.

But if they choose violence, mark my words, THEY WILL LOSE. 2014 is not 1861. The Red States are the states that still produce things, that grow food, and is where the economic growth is. This will not be a repeat of 1861-1865.

Forget the “effectiveness” of the 3AM Commandos as well, first time they have to face an actual military situation they will drop their fancy military gear and flee. Professional soldiers aren’t trained to operate ONLY with 30 to 1 numerical advantage with complete surprise in the dead of night…

Honest question:
If all the non-citizens working in Texas were replaced with Americans making the minimum wage, would the state’s GDP remain that high?
libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 2:01 PM

I sense a gotcha question and I believe that you believe it to be rhetorical. But tread carefully with what point you could gleam from it. It’s getting dangerously close to understanding that a business’s cost structure is in direct correlation to a set of multiple businesses and the GDP in which they encompass. Specifically, lowering the cost structure influences a greater output of production in the aggregate.

This of course would shatter ever collectivist economic position you seem so fond to hold.

“The president will address the Republican leadership’s unwillingness to bring immigration reform up for an up-or-down vote and the president will announce a new effort to fix as much of our broken immigration system as he can through executive action,” the official said in a statement.

kcewa on June 30, 2014 at 2:53 PM

The world is burning, the economy is in toilet, and yet the most incompetent fool welfare queens agitator is giving another campaign speech attacking his only enemies the Republicans, making jokes about them, lying about them, gets applauded by his moronic and parasite base….

I don’t have a recent poll, but a 2000 poll had 50% republican support and 40% independent support. The support has grown considerably. My guess is about 60% of Texans support the notion now, and many more would come on board if the movement received more publicity.

Honest question:
If all the non-citizens working in Texas were replaced with Americans making the minimum wage, would the state’s GDP remain that high?
libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 2:01 PM

Since you are a communist, I know you do not understand the law of supply and demand.

If the SUPPLY of workers for menial (non skilled tasks) like gathering produce was limited to American Citizens, without the unfair competition of the non taxpaying non citizen, two things would happen:

1. Wages would rise until they reached the level at which American labor would desire the work.
2. Technology would eventually augment or replace such menial labor with labor saving machines.

BOTH are good things. And since you argue that a higher minimum wage would help the economy, how can you argue that restricting farm work to American citizens causing (reducing the supply of labor willing to do the work for low wages) wages to rise would be a bad thing for the Republic of Texas?

Someone might even be able to work themselves through college or trade school with the higher wages that eliminating the illegals from the labor pool would allow. Increased opportunity!

What a Republic of Texas WOULD NOT let you do is sit on your ass, do nothing, and get a check ever month as a non disabled person of working age. You could always leave and go to California, Illinois, or New York for that.

I’d offer to marry y’all, but I’m already married and I’m not ghey, and I’m just too damned old for it all, but damn, you certainly know what you are talking about.

And you are right about Austin…The place would be a ghost town should Texas become a Republic once again…but only for a while. When the libs and the gheys leave, they’ll be replaced by new Texans or opportunistic native Texans…Either way it’s a win/win.

The National Divorce (as I think it should be called) between the Red States that choose to separate and DC) will only be as violent as the Regime wants to make it.

But if they choose violence, mark my words, THEY WILL LOSE. 2014 is not 1861. The Red States are the states that still produce things, that grow food, and is where the economic growth is. This will not be a repeat of 1861-1865.

Forget the “effectiveness” of the 3AM Commandos as well, first time they have to face an actual military situation they will drop their fancy military gear and flee. Professional soldiers aren’t trained to operate ONLY with 30 to 1 numerical advantage with complete surprise in the dead of night…

ConstantineXI on June 30, 2014 at 3:09 PM

I believe you are missing one other difference. A major moral issue (slavery) will not be in the mix. People I believe would be less inclined to fight a break.

Maybe people are starting to put two and two together re your intense concern about the implementation of Sharia Law, and American religious leaders desire to make Christianity a condition of employment. Admit it, you know you want it. And you’re closer to it. So celebrate. You won.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 1:59 PM

Has any “Christian leader”, with a following of more than, say, ten; actually called for anything like this? Muslim leaders read their koran to require that everyone convert to Islam, but no other major religion makes that demand. Including Christianity.

Now, the PC do make that demand. Note the ex-head (and Founder) of Mozilla, fired because he wasn’t “diverse enough”. Six years ago, he donated to a Prop. 8 group, who wanted to keep gay marriage illegal. It’s his opinion, he’s entitled to advance it, and both Obama and Hillary agreed with him… six years ago. But he lost his job, because of his opinion.

There are also the baker, and the photographer, who declined to participate in gay weddings. Both raked over the coals in public, and forced out of business.

So remind me again, just who wants to make subscribing to their ideology a “condition of employment”?

I believe you are missing one other difference. A major moral issue (slavery) will not be in the mix. People I believe would be less inclined to fight a break.

wifarmboy on June 30, 2014 at 3:34 PM

Actually not true.

You can argue that it is the DC-Blue State Regime that wants to force STATE SLAVERY onto the Red States.

Like I said, it’s the opposite of 1861-1865. Not only are the Red States where the industry and agriculture are, it’s the Yankees in favor of Slavery this time.

Face it: If you have to ask permission to educate your children with your own values, can only buy the toilets, light bulbs, and soft drinks DC tells you that you can, have to purchase products like health insurance, and ONLY the health insurance DC tells you that you can buy, you are NOT a free person but a slave to the State.

I didn’t expect it to be so grim in here. You won! Is nothing good enough for you people?

Or maybe, just maybe, you’re disconcerted about the reaction in the public. This isn’t really being celebrated…anyway. Maybe people are starting to put two and two together re your intense concern about the implementation of Sharia Law, and American religious leaders desire to make Christianity a condition of employment. Admit it, you know you want it. And you’re closer to it. So celebrate. You won.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 1:59 PM

OMFG, it’s YOU who wants to remove the separation of Church and State, by making Free Exercise subject to the whims of the state.

In fact, you hate the First Amendment almost as much as you hate the Second. You have been on the anti-liberty side of every recent 1A Supreme court ruling.

And as has already been pointed out to you – The Civil Rights Act ended the state mandated employment discrimination in Jim Crow laws. Lefties like to exaggerate the effects of anti-discrimination laws. There are very very few businesses out there that would refuse to hire someone from any of the groups of people lefties infantalize and worry about.

gwelf on June 30, 2014 at 12:58 PM

Here’s the text of the law. You’re wrong–it applies to much more than state-mandated employment discrimination:

Or maybe, just maybe, you’re disconcerted about the reaction in the public. This isn’t really being celebrated…anyway. Maybe people are starting to put two and two together re your intense concern about the implementation of Sharia Law, and American religious leaders desire to make Christianity a condition of employment. Admit it, you know you want it. And you’re closer to it. So celebrate. You won.

So. Cornyn is still a RINO. These ratings are a joke. They are a joke on how they are compiled. They mean nothing. Did I mention Cornyn is not conservative? Wake up

Conservative4Ever on June 30, 2014 at 4:39 PM

I’m awake, Son. Appears as though you are not. You failed to read my post where I offered that we attempted to primary Senator Cornyn here in Texas. I merely answered a question from another poster, and you climb out of your bed and jump on my azz and admonish me to ‘wake’ up’?? Bite me.

I’m awake, Son. Appears as though you are not. You failed to read my post where I offered that we attempted to primary Senator Cornyn here in Texas. I merely answered a question from another poster, and you climb out of your bed and jump on my azz and admonish me to ‘wake’ up’?? Bite me.

bimmcorp on June 30, 2014 at 4:44 PM

Hey sport unless you are in your 80’s it would be impossible that I’m your “son.” Still doesn’t change that Cornyn is NOT a conservative. You are propping up some silly ratings that proves something he isn’t. Wake up, son

Hey sport unless you are in your 80′s it would be impossible that I’m your “son.” Still doesn’t change that Cornyn is NOT a conservative. You are propping up some silly ratings that proves something he isn’t. Wake up, son

Conservative4Ever on June 30, 2014 at 4:56 PM

I use ‘son’ a lot in my posts. Sorry if that offends you. Would you prefer ‘gramps’?

I am propping no one up, sir. I was asked if Cornyn was a conservative, and I posted the result from a rating in response. I then followed up by stating that we attempted to primary Sen. Cornyn because we see him as a beltway republican, or RINO.

You, sir, are childish, and your sarcastic attempt at an insincere apology is laughable. Do us both a favor and simply leave me alone. I prefer sparring with the trolls.

Doubtful you will honor such a request, however. Have a pleasant evening.

I don’t have a recent poll, but a 2000 poll had 50% republican support and 40% independent support. The support has grown considerably. My guess is about 60% of Texans support the notion now, and many more would come on board if the movement received more publicity.

Maybe people are starting to put two and two together re your intense concern about the implementation of Sharia Law, and American religious leaders desire to make Christianity a condition of employment. Admit it, you know you want it. And you’re closer to it. So celebrate. You won.

Maybe people are starting to put two and two together re your intense concern about the implementation of Sharia Law, and American religious leaders desire to make Christianity a condition of employment. Admit it, you know you want it. And you’re closer to it. So celebrate. You won.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 1:59 PM

You really gotta stop sniffing glue. That’s NOT what is going on and you know it.

It most certainly is a co-equal branch, which is why I asked you to go read Marbury v Madison. In that decision, the Marshall Court asserted the right of the Judicial Branch to review legislation and Executive Branch decisions.

The court asserted its own power. Where is that power granted it in the constitution?

There are indeed three co-equal branches of government. Of those three, only one has actively and destructively sought to encroach on the powers of its equals, and that is the Executive Branch. The last five years have shown how much damage can be done when one of the putatively co-equal branches believes that it can do whatever the hell it wants and get away with it.

Read the federalist papers. The article establishing the federal judiciary was third for a reason. The first article specifically vests “all legislative power” in a bicameral legislature. Not some. Not most. Not everything except the power of judicial review. All.

As I mentioned in my original comment, the 2016 election is critically important. Republicans are likely to hold the House come January 2017. The Senate is a coin-flip. Ergo, the right or center-right must gain control of the White House, or we are at least a generation away from righting wrongs that might not ever be righted.

Don’t sit out 2016 because the eventual GOP candidate ain’t conservative enough. To do so is to endorse decades of ISIS-like overrun.

Conservative Mischief on June 30, 2014 at 2:48 PM

I think it’s cute that you think your vote matters. Wrong, but cute. I’m sure there’s nothing I can say that will stop you from whistling right past the graveyard, but politicians (including unelected judges) ain’t gonna fix what politicians broke.

So funny, I had to post it again. 4 stars! I laughed, I cried, I laughed again. :)

I didn’t expect it to be so grim in here. You won! Is nothing good enough for you people?

Or maybe, just maybe, you’re disconcerted about the reaction in the public. This isn’t really being celebrated…anyway. Maybe people are starting to put two and two together re your intense concern about the implementation of Sharia Law, and American religious leaders desire to make Christianity a condition of employment. Admit it, you know you want it. And you’re closer to it. So celebrate. You won.

Wife: I think that Hobby Lobby shouldn’t be allowed to not pay for contraceptives for their female employees.
Me: They do pay for 16 contraceptives for their employees. They just don’t want to be forced to pay for 4 others than can cause abortions.
Wife: I didn’t know that. Why didn’t the news say that?

My wife is normally really conservative and we went on to discuss the morality issues at play with forcing anyone to pay for something for someone else. I just thought the initial conversation on the topic was very telling.

I checked again this morning and not one single main stream media outlet explained Hobby Lobby’s true position. They are all fueling the fire and the left’s message that HL doesn’t want to cover contraceptives, which is patently false. Those in favor of religious freedom are losing the messaging in this battle because no one is holding the media accountable to report the truth. This is absolutely disgusting.

Maybe people are starting to put two and two together re your intense concern about the implementation of Sharia Law, and American religious leaders desire to make Christianity a condition of employment. Admit it, you know you want it. And you’re closer to it. So celebrate. You won.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 1:59 PM

You and your thugs kiss the terrorists’ azzes and embrace Sharia “because, just another culture, rubes”. They watch you like hawks.

So funny, I had to post it again. 4 stars! I laughed, I cried, I laughed again. :)

Or maybe, just maybe, you’re disconcerted about the reaction in the public. This isn’t really being celebrated…anyway…

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 1:59 PM

Oh Lordy, my aching ribs.:)

S. D. on July 1, 2014 at 12:13 AM

+1. It’s hard to believe the public faculty in his black history department aren’t reacting by celebrating, isn’t it? Regardless, there have been some really, really funny ones from our (D)s over this.

I didn’t expect it to be so grim in here. You won! Is nothing good enough for you people?

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 1:59 PM

.
The fight ain’t over . . . . . one battle won … next.
.

Or maybe, just maybe, you’re disconcerted about the reaction in the public. This isn’t really being celebrated…anyway.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 1:59 PM

.Most people don’t view this ruling as affecting them personally, one way or the other.

That’s a real damn shame, too. American apathy on display.
.

Maybe people are starting to put two and two together re your intense concern about the implementation of Sharia Law, and American religious leaders desire to make Christianity a condition of employment. Admit it, you know you want it. And you’re closer to it. So celebrate. You won.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 1:59 PM

.
If we didn’t have a Christian version of “Sharia Law” in this country, anytime between it’s founding and the SCOTUS decision(s) abolishing ‘public recognition of God’, then what the HANG makes you think we’re trying to impose a Christian version of “Sharia Law” today ?

The only way this makes any sense is IF … you do believe we had some Christian version of “Sharia Law”, up until the SCOTUS decision(s) abolishing ‘public recognition of God’.